Cross-Lingual Regularization for Multilingual Generalization

ABSTRACT

Approaches for cross-lingual regularization for multilingual generalization include a method for training a natural language processing (NLP) deep learning module. The method includes accessing a first dataset having a first training data entry, the first training data entry including one or more natural language input text strings in a first language; translating at least one of the one or more natural language input text strings of the first training data entry from the first language to a second language; creating a second training data entry by starting with the first training data entry and substituting the at least one of the natural language input text strings in the first language with the translation of the at least one of the natural language input text strings in the second language; adding the second training data entry to a second dataset; and training the deep learning module using the second dataset.

RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application claims priority to U.S. Provisional PatentApplication No. 62/813,691, filed Mar. 4, 2019, entitled “Cross-LingualRegularization for Multilingual Generalization,” which is herebyincorporated by reference in its entirety.

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present disclosure relates generally to training and use of machinelearning systems for natural language processing and more specificallyto cross-lingual regularization for multilingual generalization.

BACKGROUND

Deep learning-based approaches for natural language Processing (NLP)tasks often achieve state-of-the-art results but require large amountsof annotated data. These tasks include question answering, machinetranslation, document summarization, database query generation,sentiment analysis, natural language inference, semantic role labeling,relation extraction, goal-oriented dialogue, and pronoun resolution,and/or the like. For many of these tasks, data can be plentiful inhigh-resource languages, such as English, French, Spanish, German,Russian, Japanese, Chinese, and/or the like, where numerous trainingdatasets and examples are readily available. However, for low-resourcelanguages, such as Greek, Bulgarian, Turkish, Arabic, Vietnamese,Korean, Hindi, Swahili, Urdu, and/or the like, the collection andproliferation of data is limited. This poses a challenge for NLP systemsbecause systems trained on one dataset do not always transfer well toothers.

Accordingly, it would be advantageous to have systems and methods fortraining NLP systems that can handle low-resource languages.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a simplified diagram of a computing device according to someembodiments.

FIGS. 2A-2C are simplified diagrams of input text string languageselections for use during training according to some embodiments.

FIG. 3 is a simplified diagram of a method of training and using anatural language processing module using regularization according tosome embodiments.

FIG. 4 is a simplified diagram of a method of training and using anatural language processing module using multi-language regularizationaccording to some embodiments.

FIG. 5 is a simplified diagram of the effects of different types of NLPmodule initialization during regularization training according to someembodiments.

FIG. 6 is a simplified diagram of the usefulness of various languages asregularization languages for various target languages according to someembodiments.

FIGS. 7A and 7B are simplified diagrams of the effects of addingadditional regularizing language according to some embodiments.

FIGS. 8 and 9 are simplified diagrams showing the improvement ofcross-lingual regularization in comparison to multi-lingual trainingaccording to some embodiments.

FIG. 10 is a simplified diagram of the impact of translating differentinput text strings when using regularization training according to someembodiments.

In the figures, elements having the same designations have the same orsimilar functions.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

To address ways to improve NLP systems that support low-resourcelanguages, a regularization approach may be used that uses training datafrom another language to improve the performance of the NLP systemsthrough transfer learning. Multilingual regularization, is a techniquethat can be used with both generatively pretrained models and wordembeddings, without needing to explicitly further align the embeddings.The approach is easily used in conjunction with numerous existingapproaches to NLP. Additionally, the approach seamlessly scales for manylanguages and improves performance on both high- and low-resourcelanguages tested including English, French, Spanish, German, Greek,Bulgarian, Russian, Turkish, Arabic, Vietnamese, Chinese, Japanese,Korean, Hindi, Swahili, Urdu, and/or the like.

FIG. 1 is a simplified diagram of a computing device 100 according tosome embodiments. As shown in FIG. 1, computing device 100 includes aprocessor 110 coupled to memory 120. Operation of computing device 100is controlled by processor 110. And although computing device 100 isshown with only one processor 110, it is understood that processor 110may be representative of one or more central processing units,multi-core processors, microprocessors, microcontrollers, digital signalprocessors, field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), application specificintegrated circuits (ASICs), graphics processing units (GPUs), tensorprocessing units (TPUs), and/or the like in computing device 100.Computing device 100 may be implemented as a stand-alone subsystem, as aboard added to a computing device, and/or as a virtual machine.

Memory 120 may be used to store software executed by computing device100 and/or one or more data structures used during operation ofcomputing device 100. Memory 120 may include one or more types ofmachine readable media. Some common forms of machine readable media mayinclude floppy disk, flexible disk, hard disk, magnetic tape, any othermagnetic medium, CD-ROM, any other optical medium, punch cards, papertape, any other physical medium with patterns of holes, RAM, PROM,EPROM, FLASH-EPROM, any other memory chip or cartridge, and/or any othermedium from which a processor or computer is adapted to read.

Processor 110 and/or memory 120 may be arranged in any suitable physicalarrangement. In some embodiments, processor 110 and/or memory 120 may beimplemented on a same board, in a same package (e.g.,system-in-package), on a same chip (e.g., system-on-chip), and/or thelike. In some embodiments, processor 110 and/or memory 120 may includedistributed, virtualized, and/or containerized computing resources.Consistent with such embodiments, processor 110 and/or memory 120 may belocated in one or more data centers and/or cloud computing facilities.

As shown, memory 120 includes a training module 130 and an NLP module150.

Training module may be used to access a training dataset 160 in a firstlanguage and generate a multilingual regularization dataset 140 bytranslating one or more entries from training dataset 160 into one ormore second or regularizing languages. Entries from training dataset 160and the translated entries are then combined to form the entries ofregularization dataset 140. Training module 130 may then useregularization dataset 140 to train NLP module 150. In some examples,training dataset 160 may be stored locally (e.g., within memory 120and/or within one or more other storage devices, such as disk drives,solid state drives, and/or the like of computing device 100) and/orwithin one or more storage devices located remotely to computing device100 (e.g. one or more distributed and/or cloud storage devices) coupledto computing device 100 via a network. In some examples, the network mayinclude one or more local area networks (e.g., an ethernet), one or morewide area networks (e.g., the internet), and/or the like.

NLP module 150 is trained using regularization dataset 140. Oncetrained, NLP module 150 may be used to perform a NLP task, such as oneor more of question answering, machine translation, documentsummarization, database query generation, sentiment analysis, naturallanguage inference, semantic role labeling, relation extraction,goal-oriented dialogue, pronoun resolution, and/or the like. In someexamples, NLP module 150 may be used to receive a natural language inputhaving one or more input text strings 170 and generate a result 180. Insome examples, NLP module 150 may include a machine learning structure,such as one or more neural networks. Examples of neural structures forNLP processing are described in further detail in commonly-owned U.S.patent application Ser. No. 15/131,970, entitled “Multitask Learning asQuestion Answering” and filed Jun. 12, 2018, which is incorporated byreference herein.

In some examples, memory 120 may include non-transitory, tangible,machine readable media that includes executable code that when run byone or more processors (e.g., processor 110) may cause the one or moreprocessors to perform the methods described in further detail herein. Insome examples, training module 130 and/or NLP module 150 may beimplemented using hardware, software, and/or a combination of hardwareand software.

As discussed above and further emphasized here, FIG. 1 is merely anexample which should not unduly limit the scope of the claims. One ofordinary skill in the art would recognize many variations, alternatives,and modifications. According to some embodiments, training module 130and/or NLP module 150 may be located in separate computing devices. Insome examples, each of the separate computing devices may be consistentwith computing device 100.

FIGS. 2A-2C are simplified diagrams of input text string languageselections for use during training according to some embodiments. Asshown in FIGS. 2A-2C, the training data options are shown for an NLPmodule (e.g., NLP module 150) that receives two input text strings A andB, which in some examples correspond to input text strings 170. Examplesof NLP modules that receive two input text strings include naturallanguage inference, where the two input text strings include twosentences—a premise and a hypothesis. The goal of the natural languageinference NLP module is to determine whether the hypothesis logicallyentails from the premise. FIG. 2A demonstrates the monolingual approachwhere the training data set is designed to train the NLP module toprocess input text strings in language 1. To support the monolingualapproach, the training dataset includes only entries where both inputtext string A and input text string B are in language 1.

FIG. 2B demonstrates the approach when a single regularization language(language 2) is used to help train the NLP module. As FIG. 2B shows, thetraining dataset still includes the entries where both input text stringA and input text string B are in language 1. However, the trainingdataset is further augmented to form a regularization dataset (e.g.,regularization dataset 140) that includes entries where input textstring A is in language 1 and input text string B is in language 2,input text string A is in language 2 and input text string B is inlanguage 1, and input text string A is in language 2 and input textstring B is in language 2. In some examples, the entries that includeone or more of input text string A or input text string B may begenerated by manually and/or automatically (e.g., using an NLP languagetranslation module) either input text string A, input text string B, orboth input text strings A and B from entries in the original language 1training dataset to language 2. In some examples, when the goal of theNLP module is just to support language 1, the entries where both inputtext string A and input text string B are translated to language 2 maybe omitted from the regularization training dataset (e.g., nevergenerated).

FIG. 2C demonstrates the approach when two regularization languages(languages 2 and 3) are used to help train the NLP module. As FIG. 2Cshows, the training dataset includes entries where one or both of inputtext string A and input text string B are in any of the three languages1, 2, or 3. This leads to up to nine (3*3) possible languagecombinations in the regularization training dataset. In some examples,as with the single regularization language approach of FIG. 2B, the tworegularization language approach may omit entries where both of inputtext string A and input text string B are translated to either language2 or language 3.

As discussed above and further emphasized below, FIGS. 2A-2C are merelyexamples which should not unduly limit the scope of the claims. One ofordinary skill in the art would recognize many variations, alternatives,and modifications. According to some embodiments, three or moreregularization languages may be used where one or both of input textstring A and input text string B may be translated to any theregularization languages. For example, if three regularization languagesare used then there are 16 (4*4) possible language combinations in theentries in the regularization dataset or alternatively 7 (4+3) possiblelanguages combinations in the entries in the regularization dataset whenat least one of input text string A and input text string B are kept inlanguage 1. In addition, four or more regularization languages may beused as is described in further detail below.

According to some embodiments, when the NLP module uses only a singleinput text string (e.g., just input text string A), the regularizationdataset includes the original entries in language 1, but also entries inany of the regularization languages. Examples of NLP tasks that use onlya single input text string include document summarization, databasequery generation, sentiment analysis, semantic role labeling, relationextraction, goal-oriented dialogue, pronoun resolution, and/or the like.

According to some embodiments, when the training entries for the NLPmodule include ground truth answers (e.g., result 180) that are alsotext strings, the ground truth text string may also be translated to oneof the regularization language. Examples of NLP tasks that includeground truth results that are also text strings include questionanswering, database query generation, and/or the like. In some examples,it may be beneficial to limit the language of the ground truth resultsso that are consistent with the language of one of the input textstrings. In some examples, with question-answering where the input textstrings are the context and the question, the language of the groundtruth answer may be limited to the language of the context (e.g., keptas language 1 when the context is not translated or translated to thesame regularization language as the context). In some examples, withdatabase query generation, the language of the ground truth databasequery may be in the same language as the single input text string.

According to some embodiments, the same approaches may be adapted whenthere are three or more input text strings. As an example, when thereare three input text strings and one regularization language there areup to 8 (2{circumflex over ( )}3) possible language combinations in theentries of the regularization dataset. As another example, when thereare four input text strings and three regularization languages there areup to 81 (3{circumflex over ( )}4) possible language combinations in theentries of the regularization dataset.

FIG. 3 is a simplified diagram of a method 300 of training and using aNLP module according to some embodiments. One or more of the processes310-370 of method 300 may be implemented, at least in part, in the formof executable code stored on non-transitory, tangible, machine-readablemedia that when run by one or more processors (e.g., processor 110) maycause the one or more processors to perform one or more of the processes310-370. In some embodiments, method 300 may correspond to the methodsused by training module 130 and/or NLP module 150 to prepare trainingdata, train the NLP module, and/or use the NLP module to perform an NLPtask, such as one or more of question answering, document summarization,database query generation, sentiment analysis, natural languageinference, semantic role labeling, relation extraction, goal-orienteddialogue, pronoun resolution, and/or the like.

At a process 310, a dataset with training data entries in a firstlanguage is obtained. In some examples, the dataset may include aplurality of training data entries in the first language. In someexamples, each of the training data entries may include one or moreinput text strings in the first language (e.g., consistent with inputtext strings 170) and a ground truth result (e.g., consistent withresult 180). In some examples, the dataset may be consistent withtraining dataset 160. A copy of the training dataset then becomes aregularization dataset. In some examples, the dataset may be obtainedfrom a database, a data store, and/or the like.

At a process 320, a training data entry (e.g., a training data sample)from the dataset is selected. In some examples, the training data entrymay be selected randomly. In some examples, the selection of trainingdata entries may be tracked so that no training data entry is selectedand translated (as discussed below) so that a duplicate training dataentry of a previously generated training data entry is not created.

At a process 330, one or more of the text strings from the selectedtraining data entry is translated to a second language. In someexamples, the one or more of the text strings may be randomly selectedfrom any of the one more input text strings and/or the ground truth textstring (where applicable). In some examples, the second language may beselected from any of one or more regularization languages used duringmethod 300. In some examples, when two or more of the one or more inputtext strings and/or the ground truth text string are translated, theymay be translated to a same or different second languages from the oneor more regularization languages. In some examples, the translatingduring process 330 may generate a training data entry with combinationsof languages consistent with those discussed with respect to FIGS.2A-2C. In some examples, one or more of the one or more second languagesmay be a high-resource language, such as English, French, Spanish,German, Russian, Japanese, Chinese, and/or the like.

At a process 340, the training data entry as translated by process 330is added to the regularization dataset. Thus, the regularization datasetincludes both the training data entries from the dataset obtained duringprocess 310 as well as training data entries with one or more translatedtext strings.

At a process 350, it is determined whether additional training dataentries should be selected, translated, and added to the regularizationdataset. In some examples, processes 320-350 may be repeated until aconfigurable percentage (e.g., 50 to 100 percent) of the training dataentries of the dataset obtained during process 310 are selected andtranslated. In some examples, processes 320-350 may be repeated until asize of the regularization dataset (in terms of a number of trainingdata entries) is N times larger than a size of the dataset obtainedduring process 310. In some examples, N may be selected based on one ormore of a configurable percentage of training data entries from thedataset obtained during process 310, a number of text strings in eachtraining data entry, and/or a number of regularization languages used totranslate the text strings during process 330. When further trainingdata entries are to be selected and translated, method 300 returns toprocess 320 to select another training data entry from the datasetobtained during process 310. When method 300 is done selecting andtranslating training data entries, training of a NLP module (e.g., NLPmodule 150) begins with a process 360.

At the process 360, the NLP module is trained using the regularizationdataset. In some examples, the NLP module may be trained usingsupervised learning, such as by using back propagation, stochasticgradient descent techniques, and/or the like.

At a process 370, the NLP module is used to perform an NLP task. In someexamples, the NLP task may be performed by presenting a natural languageinput including one or more input text strings (e.g., the one more inputtext strings 170) to the NLP module and having the NLP module generate aresult (e.g., result 180.) In some examples, the NLP module may performthe NLP task by receiving the input text strings at an input layer to aneural network, forward propagating the natural language input through amulti-layer neural network, and generating the result at an outputlayer. In some examples, the NLP task may include one or more ofquestion answering, document summarization, database query generation,sentiment analysis, natural language inference, semantic role labeling,relation extraction, goal-oriented dialogue, pronoun resolution, and/orthe like.

Method 300 of FIG. 3 describes the case when the regularizationlanguages (e.g., the second languages) are selected prior to training.However, because multiple languages may be used as regularizationlanguages, it may be useful to systematically add regularizationlanguages to further improve the training of the NLP module. FIG. 4 is asimplified diagram of a method 400 of training and using a naturallanguage processing module using multi-language regularization accordingto some embodiments. One or more of the processes 410-490 of method 400may be implemented, at least in part, in the form of executable codestored on non-transitory, tangible, machine-readable media that when runby one or more processors (e.g., processor 110) may cause the one ormore processors to perform one or more of the processes 410-490. In someembodiments, similar to method 300, method 400 may correspond to themethods used by training module 130 and/or NLP module 150 to preparetraining data, train the NLP module, and/or use the NLP module toperform an NLP task.

At a process 410, a dataset with training data entries in a firstlanguage is obtained. In some examples, process 410 may be substantiallythe same as process 310.

At a process 420, a NLP module is initialized. Before training canbegin, the weights, biases, and/or other trainable parameters of the NLPmodule are initialized. In some examples, the NLP module may beinitialized randomly. In some examples, the random initialization of theNLP module may begin with a same random number seed each time process420 is performed. In some examples, the NLP module may be initializedbased on previous training (e.g., during a previous pass throughprocesses 420-470).

According to some embodiments, random initialization of the NLP moduleis preferred over pretraining of the NLP modules as shown in FIG. 5,which is a simplified diagram of the effects of different types of NLPmodule initialization during regularization training according to someembodiments. As shown in FIG. 5, the effectiveness of variousregularization languages (Arabic/ar, Bulgarian/br, German/de, Greek/el,English/en, Spanish/es, French/fr, Hindi/hi, Russian/ru, Swahili/sw,Turkish/tr, Urdu/ur, Vietnamese/vi, and Chinese/zh) for various target(first) languages when the NLP module is trained from a randominitialization is better than when the NLP module has a pre-trainedinitialization. Each of the entries in FIG. 5 shows the relativeimprovement from a random initialization relative to a pretrainedinitialization.

Referring back to FIG. 4, at a process 430, a language is added to a setof regularization languages. In some examples, the language to add maybe selected from a high-resource language, such as English, French,Spanish, German, Russian, Japanese, Chinese, and/or the like. In someexamples, the language to add may be selected from a set of languagesknown to be good regularization languages and/or good regularizationlanguages for the first language. In some examples, the language to addmay be selected in order based on how well the language to add is likelyto aid in the training of the NLP module relative to the languagesavailable as regularization languages. A language may only be added tothe set of regularization languages once during the performance ofmethod 400. In some examples, the usefulness of a language as aregularization language for the first language may be determined basedon the training of other NLP modules (e.g., that perform a similarand/or related NLP task and/or using similar and/or related trainingdatasets).

FIG. 6 is a simplified diagram of the usefulness of various languages asregularization languages for various target languages according to someembodiments. FIG. 6 shows the relative improvement between monolingualtraining (e.g., no regularization language) for various target languagesand training with various regularization languages for the BERT_(ML) NLPmodel against the Cross-lingual Natural Language Inference (XNLI)dataset. The BERT_(ML) NLP model is described in further detail inDevlin, et al., “Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers forLanguage Understanding,” 2018, available athttps://arxiv.org/abs/1810.04805, which is incorporated by referenceherein. The XNLI dataset is described in further detail Conneau, et al.,“XNLI: Evaluating Cross-lingual Sentence Representations, 2018,available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.05053, which is incorporated byreference herein

As shown in FIG. 6, each row corresponds to a target language (e.g., thefirst language) for the NLP module and the columns correspond to each ofthe regularization languages. Diagonal entries correspond to the testingscores for the target language using monolingual training without aregularization language. Entries off the diagonal show the improvementor non-improvement when the corresponding regularization language isused during training of the NLP module for the target language. As FIG.6, shows, each of the target languages has at least one regularizationlanguage that may be used to improve the performance of the NLP module.For example, when Hindi (hi) is the target language, monolingualtraining results in a testing score of 67.3 and use of German (de) asthe regularization language (when translating only one of the premise orthe hypothesis, but not both) improves the testing score by 3.3 to 70.6.Hindi regularized by German represents the strongest improvement,whereas Vietnamese regularized by Spanish represents the weakestimprovement of 0.6.

FIG. 6 further shows that lower-resource languages tend to be lesseffective as regularization languages. For example, the abundance ofnegative (e.g., reductions in testing score) in the Urdu (ur) columnreveals that Urdu tends to be a poor regularization language. In theaggregate, tsing Urdu as the regularization language hurts testing scoreby an average of 1.8. However, Urdu benefits strongly from using aregularization language.

Charts like FIG. 6 may be used to determine the order in which languagesare selectively added to the set of regularization languages byselecting the regularization languages for the first languagecorresponding to the entries in the row for the first language fromlargest to smallest. In some examples, when a chart like FIG. 6 is notavailable or because different results may be obtained for different NLPmodules and different training datasets, the order in which to addlanguages to the set of regularization languages are selected may bebased on an average of the improvements from each of the columns of alanguage comparison chart, like that in FIG. 6.

Referring back to FIG. 4, at a process 440, a regularization dataset iscreated from the dataset obtained during process 410 and the set ofregularization languages. In some examples, process 440 may besubstantially similar to processes 310-350 of method 300.

At a process 450, the NLP module is trained using the regularizationdataset. In some examples, process 450 may be substantially similar toprocess 360.

At a process 460, the NLP module is tested. In some examples, aconfigurable portion (e.g., 20-40 percent) of the training data entriesin the dataset obtained during process 410 may be reserved for testing.The training data entries to be used for testing are randomly removedfrom the dataset and placed in a testing dataset before creating theregularization dataset during process 440. During process 460, the inputtext strings of each of the training data entries in the testing datasetis applied to the NLP module and a result is generated. The result iscompared to the ground truth result in the corresponding training dataentry and a testing score is determined based on an aggregation of thecomparisons for each of the training data entries in the testingdataset.

At a process 470, it is determined whether the improvements in thetesting score for the NLP module after training with the additionallanguage added to the set of regularization languages are greater thanthreshold better than the testing score for the NLP module without theadditional language added to the set of regularization languages. Insome examples, when this is the first pass through processes 420-470,the testing score for the NLP module without the additional languagecorresponds to the NLP module trained using only monolingual trainingdata entries. In some examples, the threshold may be negative allowingsome decrease in the testing score of the NLP module while stillallowing additional languages to be added to the set of regularizationlanguages. In some examples, when the improvements in the testing scorefor the current pass through processes 420-470 is negative, theimprovements may be determined relative to the last testing score thatwas a positive improvement on a previous testing score so that repeatednegative improvements above the threshold may eventually end therepetition of processes 420-470. When the improvements are above thethreshold, processes 420-470 are repeated with another language beingadded to the set of regularization languages. When the improvements arebelow the threshold or when no more languages are available to add,method 400 continues with a process 480.

At the process 480, the best of the trained NLP modules is selected.Using the testing scores determined during process 460, the trained NLPmodule with the highest testing score is selected for use to perform NLPtasks.

At a process 490, the selected NLP module is used to perform a NLP task.In some examples, process 490 is substantially similar to process 370.

As discussed above and further emphasized below, FIGS. 3 and 4 aremerely examples which should not unduly limit the scope of the claims.One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize many variations,alternatives, and modifications. According to some embodiments, when thefirst language is a low-resource language, it may be advantageous tobuild the regularization dataset in reverse to the approach used duringprocesses 320-350 and/or process 440. In some examples, a dataset foreach of the regularization languages may be obtained and one or moreand/or all of the input text strings and/or the result text string(where applicable) of the training data entries may be translated to thefirst language or to one of the other regularization languages with theresulting training data entries being added to the regularizationdataset.

FIGS. 7A and 7B are simplified diagrams of the effects of addingadditional regularizing language according to some embodiments. FIG. 7Ashows plots of the testing score (e.g., as determined during process 460of method 400) as additional regularization languages are added to theset of regularization languages. The choice of regularization languageto add to the set of regularization languages during process 430 is theregularization language having the best improvement for the first/targetlanguage that was not already in the set of regularization languagesaccording to the improvements shown in FIG. 7A. As FIG. 7A, furthershows the addition of some regularization languages to the set ofregularization languages results in a temporary decrease in testingscore but continuing to add additional regularization languages oftenresults in a better overall testing score even with the temporarydecrease in testing score. This justifies the use of a negativethreshold in process 470. In addition, use of the iterative approach ofmethod 400 shows an improvement in testing score relative to use of asingle regularization language with method 300.

FIG. 7B shows the impact of adding additional regularization languagesin the training of a long short-term memory (LSTM) based NLP model. TheLSTM-based NLP model uses the same tokenization embeddings used for theBERT_(ML) model, passes the input text strings through a two-layerbi-directional LSTM (BiLSTM), projects the outputs from the final BiLSTMlayer to a lower dimension, max-pools the results, and then passes thatthrough a final three-class classification layer. Thus, FIG. 7B showsthat using more than one regularizing language also improves testingscores for NLP models other than the BERT_(ML) model.

FIGS. 8 and 9 are simplified diagrams showing the improvement ofcross-lingual regularization in comparison to multi-lingual trainingaccording to some embodiments. FIG. 8 shows the improvements in testingscores of both multilingual training using multilingual trainingdatasets (left bars) and training using the regularization approach ofmethod 300 (right bars) over monolingual training. As shown, both themultilingual and the regularization approaches of method 300 improve thetesting scores for NLP models targeting English (en), German (de), andRussian (ru) using six other regularization languages, but theregularization approach of method 300 shows better improvements than themultilingual training approach. FIG. 9 shows the improvements in testingscore of the regularization approach of method 400 (Greedy XLR) over themultilingual training for the BERT_(ML) model from Devlin, et al. Thebold entries represent state-of-the-art testing scores using method 400.

FIG. 10 is a simplified diagram of the impact of translating differentinput text strings when using regularization training according to someembodiments. FIG. 10 shows the improvements in both the EM and nF1testing scores for a NLP model trained for question answering using theStanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD). SQuAD is described in moredetail in Rajpurkar, et al. “Squad: 100,000+ Questions for MachineComprehension Text,” Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on EmpiricalMethods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), which is incorporated byreference herein FIG. 10 shows the changes in EM and nF1 testing scoresfor the NLP model targeting English where translations during process330 are allowed to provide translations of both the question (Ques.) andcontext input text strings to the regularization languages shown (upperhalf of FIG. 10) and when only the context input text string is allowedto be translated (lower half of FIG. 10).

According to some embodiments, a method for training a natural languageprocessing (NLP) deep learning module includes accessing a first datasetcomprising a plurality of first training data entries having one or moreinput text string in a first language; initializing the deep learningmodule; adding a second language to a set of regularization languages;creating a plurality of second training data entries by: selectingtraining data entries from the first dataset and translating one or moreof the one or more input text strings to a third language in the set ofregularization languages; combining the plurality of first training dataentries and the second training data entries to form a training dataset;training the deep learning module using the training dataset; testingthe trained deep learning module; repeating the initializing, adding,creating, combining, training, and testing until a testing score for thetrained deep learning module improves by less than a threshold amount;selecting the trained deep learning module with a highest testing score;and using the trained deep learning module with the highest testingscore to perform a NLP task.

Some examples of computing devices, such as computing device 100 mayinclude non-transitory, tangible, machine readable media that includeexecutable code that when run by one or more processors (e.g., processor110) may cause the one or more processors to perform the processes ofmethods 300 and/or 400. Some common forms of machine readable media thatmay include the processes of methods 300 and/or 400 are, for example,floppy disk, flexible disk, hard disk, magnetic tape, any other magneticmedium, CD-ROM, any other optical medium, punch cards, paper tape, anyother physical medium with patterns of holes, RAM, PROM, EPROM,FLASH-EPROM, any other memory chip or cartridge, and/or any other mediumfrom which a processor or computer is adapted to read.

This description and the accompanying drawings that illustrate inventiveaspects, embodiments, implementations, or applications should not betaken as limiting. Various mechanical, compositional, structural,electrical, and operational changes may be made without departing fromthe spirit and scope of this description and the claims. In someinstances, well-known circuits, structures, or techniques have not beenshown or described in detail in order not to obscure the embodiments ofthis disclosure Like numbers in two or more figures represent the sameor similar elements.

In this description, specific details are set forth describing someembodiments consistent with the present disclosure. Numerous specificdetails are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding ofthe embodiments. It will be apparent, however, to one skilled in the artthat some embodiments may be practiced without some or all of thesespecific details. The specific embodiments disclosed herein are meant tobe illustrative but not limiting. One skilled in the art may realizeother elements that, although not specifically described here, arewithin the scope and the spirit of this disclosure. In addition, toavoid unnecessary repetition, one or more features shown and describedin association with one embodiment may be incorporated into otherembodiments unless specifically described otherwise or if the one ormore features would make an embodiment non-functional.

Although illustrative embodiments have been shown and described, a widerange of modification, change and substitution is contemplated in theforegoing disclosure and in some instances, some features of theembodiments may be employed without a corresponding use of otherfeatures. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize manyvariations, alternatives, and modifications. Thus, the scope of theinvention should be limited only by the following claims, and it isappropriate that the claims be construed broadly and in a mannerconsistent with the scope of the embodiments disclosed herein.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method for training a natural languageprocessing (NLP) deep learning module, the method comprising: accessinga first dataset comprising a first training data entry, the firsttraining data entry including one or more natural language input textstrings in a first language; translating at least one of the one or morenatural language input text strings of the first training data entryfrom the first language to a second language; creating a second trainingdata entry by starting with the first training data entry andsubstituting the at least one of the natural language input text stringsin the first language with the translation of the at least one of thenatural language input text strings in the second language; adding thesecond training data entry to a second dataset; and training the deeplearning module using the second dataset.
 2. The method of claim 1,further comprising copying a second training data entry from the firstdataset to the second dataset.
 3. The method of claim 1, furthercomprising using the deep learning module to perform an NLP task.
 4. Themethod of claim 3, wherein NLP task includes one or more of questionanswering, document summarization, database query generation, sentimentanalysis, natural language inference, semantic role labeling, relationextraction, goal-oriented dialogue, or pronoun resolution.
 5. The methodof claim 1, further comprising: translating at least one of the one ormore natural language input text strings of the first training dataentry from the first language to a third language; creating a thirdtraining data entry by starting with the first training data entry andsubstituting the at least one of the natural language input text stringsin the first language with the translation of the at least one of thenatural language input text strings in the third language; and addingthe third training data entry to the second dataset.
 6. The method ofclaim 1, further comprising repeatedly selecting additional trading dataentries from the first dataset, translating one or more of the inputtext strings of the additional trading data entries to the secondlanguage, creating new training data entries from the additional tradingdata entries and the translations, and adding the new training dataentries to the second dataset until a configurable number of newtraining data entries are added to the second dataset.
 7. The method ofclaim 1, further comprising selecting the second language because it isknown to be a good regularization language for the first language. 8.The method of claim 1, wherein the deep learning module comprises aneural network.
 9. A system comprising: a memory; and one or moreprocessors; wherein the one or more processors are configured toimplement a training module that: accesses a first dataset comprising afirst training data entry, the first training data entry including oneor more natural language input text strings in a first language;translates at least one of the one or more natural language input textstrings of the first training data entry from the first language to asecond language; creates a second training data entry by starting withthe first training data entry and substituting the at least one of thenatural language input text strings in the first language with thetranslation of the at least one of the natural language input textstrings in the second language; adds the second training data entry to asecond dataset; and trains a deep learning module using the seconddataset.
 10. The system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processorsare further configured to copy a second training data entry from thefirst dataset to the second dataset.
 11. The system of claim 9, whereinthe one or more processors are further configured to use the deeplearning module to perform an NLP task.
 12. The system of claim 11,wherein NLP task includes one or more of question answering, documentsummarization, database query generation, sentiment analysis, naturallanguage inference, semantic role labeling, relation extraction,goal-oriented dialogue, or pronoun resolution.
 13. The system of claim9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:translate at least one of the one or more natural language input textstrings of the first training data entry from the first language to athird language; create a third training data entry by starting with thefirst training data entry and substituting the at least one of thenatural language input text strings in the first language with thetranslation of the at least one of the natural language input textstrings in the third language; and add the third training data entry tothe second dataset.
 14. The system of claim 9, wherein the one or moreprocessors are further configured to repeatedly select additionaltrading data entries from the first dataset, translate one or more ofthe input text strings of the additional trading data entries to thesecond language, create new training data entries from the additionaltrading data entries and the translations, and add the new training dataentries to the second dataset until a configurable number of newtraining data entries are added to the second dataset.
 15. The system ofclaim 9, wherein the deep learning module comprises a neural network.16. A non-transitory machine-readable medium comprising executable codewhich when executed by one or more processors associated with acomputing device are adapted to cause the one or more processors toperform a method comprising: accessing a first training sample having afirst input text string in a target language; translating the firstinput text string from the target language to a regularization language;creating a second training sample by replacing the first input textstring in the first training sample with the first input text string inthe regularization language; adding the second training sample to atraining dataset; and training a deep learning module using the trainingdataset.
 17. The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16,wherein the method further comprises: accessing a third training samplehaving a second input text string in the target language; and copyingthe third training sample to the training dataset.
 18. Thenon-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the methodfurther comprises using the deep learning module to perform an NLP taskselected from a group consisting of: question answering, documentsummarization, database query generation, sentiment analysis, naturallanguage inference, semantic role labeling, relation extraction,goal-oriented dialogue, or pronoun resolution.
 19. The non-transitorymachine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the method furthercomprises: translating the first input text string of the first trainingsample from the target language to a second regularization language;creating a third training sample by replacing the first input textstring in the first training sample with the first input text string inthe second regularization language; and adding the third training sampleto the training dataset.
 20. The non-transitory machine-readable mediumof claim 16, wherein the method further comprises: repeatedly accessingadditional trading samples, translating one or more input text stringsof the additional trading samples to the regularization language,creating new training samples from the additional trading samples andthe translations, and adding the new training samples to the trainingdataset until a configurable number of new training samples are added tothe training dataset.